Models for the acceptance of tele-care solutions: Intention vs behaviour

Gerontechnology

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 45-55

  Bouwhuis, D G ^a,b   Meesters, L M J ^b   Sponselee, A A M ^c  

^a NAN KAI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Taiwan)

^b EINDHOVEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

^c FONTYS UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Quality of experience; Technology adoption; User acceptance

Indexed keywords

EID: 84867703195     PISSN: 15691101     EISSN: 1569111X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4017/gt.2012.11.01.007.00     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Lindström JI, Stallard J, Bouwhuis DG, Breimesser F, Campo M, Pouillie R, Varriot C. An evaluation of the Bridge phase of TIDE 2000. http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/information_society/evaluation/data/pdf/reporttide_en.pdf; retrieved April 14, 2012.
2. Research and Innovation, European Commission http://ec.europa.eu/research/leaflets/disabilities/page_74_en.html; retrieved March 2, 2012.
3. Eyck A. Domotica in Senioren Woningen. Zijn Ouderen Bereid deze Nieuwe Voorzieningen te Accepteren en Zijn ze ook in Staat om ze te Gebruiken? (Domotics in Senior Houses. Are Elderly Prepared to Accept these Provisions and Are they also Capable to Use Them?) 2004; Master thesis, Maastricht University.
4. Bouwhuis DG, Meesters LMJ, Berentsen J. Technology Acceptance Models in Gerontechnology. Smart Technologies for an active longevity 2008; Proceedings ISG'08.
5. Meesters LMJ, Koks Y. Tele-Welness Services: evaluation of lengthy use 2010; poster Biomedica 2010 Summit, 17-18 March, Aachen.
6. Sponselee A, Schouten B, Bouwhuis D. telecare for elderly users: Needs and benefits. Gerontechnology 2010;9(2):249; doi:10.4017/gt.2010.09.02.277.00.
7. Viedome, http://www.viedome.tv/; retrieved April 14, 2012.
8. PAL4: www.pal4.nl/website/home/; retrieved April 9, 2012.
9. Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology, MIS Quarterly 1989;13(3):319-340.
10. Henderson L. Orthographies and Reading: Perspectives from Cognitive Psychology, Neuropsychology, and Linguistics. London: Taylor & Francis, Inc. 1984; ISBN-13: 9780863770098.
11. Hinton G; personal communication; 1979
12. Edwards AL. Techniques of attitude scale construction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall 1957.
13. Kamtekar R. Plato on the Attribution of Conative Attitudes. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 2006;88(2):127-162; doi:10.1515/AGPH.2006.006.
14. Brett GS. History of Psychology. London: Allen; 1921; Internet Archive cu3192403103676.
15. Zanna MP, Rempel JK. Attitudes: A new look at an old concept. In D. Bar-Tal & A. Kruglanski (editors): The social psychology of knowledge 1988; New York: Cambridge University Press.
16. Zimbardo P, Weber AL, Johnson RL. Psychology: Core Concepts 1999. 3rd edition. Indianapolis: Addison Wesley Longman.
17. Rosenberg MJ. Cognitive Structures and Attitudinal Affect. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 1956;53(3):367-372; doi:10.1037/h0044579.
18. Ajzen I, Fishbein M. The prediction of behavior from attitudinal and normative variables. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 1970;6(4):466-487; doi:10.1016/0022-1031(70)90057-0.
19. Jagdish NS, Park CW. Equivalence of Fishbein and Rosenberg theories of attitudes. Faculty Working Papers April 1973, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; www.archive.org/details/equivalenceoffis108shet; retrieved April 14, 2012.
20. Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Predicting and Changing Behavior: the Reasoned Action Approach 2010; New York: Taylor & Francis.
21. Ajzen I. From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In Kuhl J Beckmann J editors, Action-Control: From cognition to behavior. New York: Springer;1985.
22. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman; 1997.
23. Ajzen I. The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 1991;50(2):179-211; doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.
24. Linn RL, Werts CE. Measurement Error in Regression. In Keren G, eitor, Statistical and Methodological Issues in Psychology and Social Sciences Research 1982; Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
25. Thurstone LL Attitudes Can Be Measured. American Journal of Sociology 1928;33(4):529-554; www.jstor.org/stable/2765691; retrieved April 14, 2012.
26. Docampo Rama, M. Technology Generations handling complex User Interfaces. PhD thesis; Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, 2001.
27. Freudenthal TD, Learning to Use Interactive Devices; Age Differences in the Reasoning Process; PhD thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven; 1998
28. Freudenthal A. The design of home appliances for young and old customers. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft; 1999.
29. Langdon P, Lewis T, Clarkson J. The effects of prior experience on the use of consumer products. Universal Access to the Information Society 2007;6(2):179-191; doi:10.1007/s10209-007-0082-z.
30. Sponselee A, Schouten B, Bouwhuis D, Willems Ch. Smart Home Technology for the Elderly: Perceptions of Multidisciplinary Stakeholders. In: Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Human Aspects in Ambient Intelligence 2007; In: M. Mühlhäuser, A. Ferscha, and E. Aitenbichler, editors, Constructing Ambient Intelligence: AmI 2007 Workshops Darmstadt, Germany, November 7-10, 2007, Revised Papers. Series: Communications in Computer and Information Science 2008;11:314-326.
31. Meesters L, Berentsen J, Vergouwen R. Telemedicine trial: user acceptance, a case study. 2008 (In Dutch) Report IOP-MMI06102 and Interreg project VIPLab; www.vip-lab.org/pilots/zorg_onderzoek.php; retrieved April 14, 2012.
32. Waller KV, Bates RC. Health Locus of Control and Self-Efficacy Beliefs in a Healthy Elderly Sample. American Journal of Health Promotion 1992;6(4):302-309; doi:10.4278/0890-1171-6.4.302.
33. Peterson L, Howland J, Kielhofner G, Lachman ME, Assmann S, Cote J, Jette A. Falls self-efficacy and occupational adaption among elders. Physical and Occupational Therapy in Geriatrics 1999;16(1-2):1-16; doi:10.1080/J148v16n01_01.
34. Cheal B, Clemson L. Older people enhancing self-efficacy in fall-risk situations. Australian Occupational Therapy 2001;48(2):80-91; doi:10.1046/ j.1440-1630.2001.00250.x.
35. Li F, McAuley E, Fisher KJ, Harmer P, Chaumeton NR, Wilson N. Self-efficacy as a mediator between fear of falling and functional balance, physical functioning in elderly persons. Journal of Aging and Health 2002;14(4):452-466; doi:10.1177/089826402237178.
36. Hellström K, Lindmark B, Wahlberg B, Fugl-Meyer AR. Self-efficacy in relation to impairments and activities of daily living disability in elderly patients with stroke: a prospective investigation. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2003;35(5):202-207; doi:10.1080/16501970310000836.
37. Wu AMS, Tang CSK, Kwok TCY. Self-efficacy, health locus of control, and psychological distress in elderly Chinese women with chronic illnesses. Aging & Mental Health 2004; 8(1):21-28; doi:10.1080/13607860310001613293.
38. Carroll D. The importance of self-efficacy expectations in elderly patients recovering from coronary artery bypass surgery. Heart & Lung: The Journal of Acute and Critical Care 2006;24(1):50-59; doi:10.1016/S0147-9563(05)80095-
39. Galvāo DA, Nosaka K, Taaffe DR, Spry N, Kristjanson LJ, McGuigan MR, Suzuki K, Yamaya K, Newton RU. Resistance Training and Reduction of Treatment Side Effects in Prostate Cancer Patients. Medicine & Science in Sports and Exercise 2006;38(12):2045-2052; doi:10.1249/01.mss.0000233803.48691.8b.
40. Pang MYC, Eng JL. Fall-related self-efficacy, not balance and mobility performance, is related to accidental falls in chronic stroke survivors with low bone mineral density. Osteoporosis International 2008;19(7): 919-927; doi:10.1007/s00198-007-0519-5.
41. Nap HH. Stress in Senior Computer Interaction. PhD thesis. Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven; 2008.
42. Nap HH, de Greef P, Bouwhuis DG. Self-efficacy support in senior computer interaction. International Journal of Cognitive Performance Support 2012; in print.
43. Gallagher R, Donoghue J, Chenoweth L, Stein-Parbury J. Self-management in older patients with chronic illness. International Journal of Nursing Practice, 2008;14(5):373-382; doi:10.1111/j.1440-172X.2008.00709.x.
44. Terrace HS. Discrimination learning with and without "errors". Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 1963;6(1):1-27; doi:10.1901/jeab.1963.6-1.
45. Goldenberg G, Hagmann S. The meaning of meaningless gestures: a study of visuo-imitative apraxia. Neuropsychologia 1997;35(3):333-341; doi:10.1249/01.mss.0000233803.48691.8b.
46. Heugten CM van, Dekker J, Deelman BG, van Dijk AJ, Stehmann-Saris JC, Kinebanian A. Outcome of strategy training in stroke patients with apraxia: a phase II study. Clinical Rehabilitation 1998;12(4):294-303; doi:10.1191/026921598674468328.
47. Connor BB. Response guided errorless learning with normal elderly. PhD thesis, University of North Texas, Denton; 2001.
48. Nosofsky RM. Attention, similarity, and the identication-categorization relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 1986;115(1):39-57; doi:10.1037/0096-3445.115.1.39.
49. Hintzman DL. 'Schema Abstraction' in a Multiple-Trace Memory Model. Psychological Review 1986; 93(4):411-428; doi:10.1037/0033-295X.93.4.411.
50. Cunningham AE, Stanovitch K. What Reading Does For the Mind" American Educator/American Federation of Teachers 1998;13(1):8-15.
51. Ehri LC, Rosenthal, J. Spellings of Words: A Neglected Facilitator of Vocabulary Learning. Journal of Literacy Research 2007;39(4):389-409; doi:10.1080/10862960701675341.
52. Agarwal R, Prasad J. Are Individual Differences Germane to the Acceptance of New Information Technologies? Decision Sciences 1999;30(2):361-391; doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.1999.tb01614.x.
53. Huang JC. Exploring the Acceptance of Tele-care Among Senior Citizens: An Application of Back-Propagation Network. Telemedicine and e-Health 2011;17(2):111-117; doi:10.1089/tmj.2010.0118.
54. Venkatesh V, Morris M, Davis GB, Davis FD. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view, MIS Quarterly 2003;27(3):425-478.
55. Rotter JB. Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement, Psychological Monographs 1966;80(609).